Shortly after a gunman opened fire at his rally in Butler, Pennsylvania, Donald Trump said the projectile that hit his ear and caused it to bleed was a bullet.
But in testimony before the House judiciary committee yesterday, FBI director Christopher Wray said it was not clear if that was indeed the case, or if Trump was struck by shrapnel:
You must log in or register to comment.
Kinda turned off by the intentionally misleading headline. I’m glad they immediately clarify in the body of the text, but it’s just click bait/rage bait.
Someone clearly shot at the guy, what does it matter if it was shrapnel that made the fucker bleed.
I think it’s because trump is taking the martyr stance. Getting hit by a bullet and getting hit by shrapnel while people actually died around you is a different take.
No, it’s the same as far as I’m concerned. If you’re close enough to be hit by shrapnel, that totally counts as an assassination attempt, and we should all be furious regardless of political persuasion.
I despise Trump, but I will also be the first one to attack any argument that somehow this wasn’t a big deal.
From the standpoint of how seriously the assassination attempt should be taken I agree that it doesn’t matter whether he was hit by a bullet or shrapnel. Either way a presidential candidate was shot at and people around him were injured or killed. The article is definitely problematic.
The testimony probably isn’t problematic though. From an investigatory standpoint getting as much detail as possible correct is important. The results of the investigation will be used to identify where security failed and attempt to improve security in the future. Getting the details right may prevent or lessen the severity of another assassination attempt.
